Objective measures of viewing behaviour in children during near tasks

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Objective assessment of near viewing behaviours performed in a laboratory setting showed that children demonstrate differing viewing distances and angles based on the type of task. Findings will contribute to our understanding of how near work influences myopia.

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that near working distance and viewing breaks are associated with myopia. The purpose of this study was to use an objective, continuously measuring range finding device to examine these viewing behaviours in children.

METHODS

Viewing distance, number of breaks, and head and eye angles were assessed in 16 non-myopic and 19 myopic children (ages 13.38 ± 4.14 years) using the Clouclip, an objective rangefinder, during five 15-minute near tasks, including (a) passive reading and (b) active writing on printed material, (c) passive viewing and (d) active engagement on an iPad, and (e) active engagement on a cell phone. Height and Harmon distance were measured. Viewing behaviours were analysed by task, refractive error group, and gender.

RESULTS

Mean viewing distances significantly differed by task (P < 0.001) and were highly correlated with children's Harmon distance and height for all near tasks (P < 0.05), except for the active printed task (P > 0.05). Viewing distances did not differ by gender or refractive error group. During each task, mean number of viewing breaks was 2.6 ± 4.1 and did not vary between task (P = 0.92) or refractive error group (P = 0.65). Head declination and total viewing angle varied by type of near task (P < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSION

Children demonstrated differing viewing distances and viewing angles based on the type of near task they were performing. Viewing behaviours did not vary between myopic and non-myopic children. Findings will contribute to a better understanding of how near viewing behaviours can be quantified objectively and relationships with myopia.

Objective Measures of Near Viewing and Light Exposure in Schoolchildren during COVID-19

SIGNIFICANCE

Wearable sensors provide the opportunity for continuous objective measurement of the visual environment with high resolution. Our findings show that absolute and temporal properties of near viewing and time outdoors vary between myopic and nonmyopic schoolchildren, which are important considerations when studying refractive error pathogenesis.

PURPOSE

Numerous behavioral factors, including near work, time outdoors, electronic device use, and sleep, have been linked to myopia. The purpose of this study was to assess behaviors using subjective and objective methods in myopic and nonmyopic schoolchildren in the United States.

METHODS

Forty children (aged 14.6 ± 0.4 years) simultaneously wore two sensors for 1 week, a Clouclip for objective measurement of near viewing and light exposure and an Actiwatch for objective measurement of activity and sleep. Parents completed an activity questionnaire for their child. Near-viewing distance, daily duration, short-duration (>1 minute) and long-duration (>30 minutes) near-viewing episodes, light exposure, time outdoors, electronic device use, and sleep duration were analyzed by refractive error group and day of the week.

RESULTS

Objectively measured daily near-viewing duration was 6.9 ± 0.3 hours. Myopes spent more time in near + intermediate viewing than nonmyopes (P = .008) and had higher diopter hours (P = .03). Short- and long-duration near-viewing episodes were similar between groups (P < .05 for both). Daily light exposure and time outdoors were significantly lower for myopes (P < .05 for both). Electronic device use (12.0 ± 0.7 hours per day) and sleep duration (8.2 ± 0.2 hours per night) were similar between groups (P > .05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Objective and subjective measures confirm that myopic and nonmyopic schoolchildren exhibit different behaviors. Combining wearable sensors with questionnaires provides a comprehensive description of children's visual environment to better understand factors that contribute to myopia.

Validation of the Clouclip and utility in measuring viewing distance in adults

PURPOSE

To validate the Clouclip, a continuously measuring objective rangefinder, and examine viewing behaviours during various near tasks in non-myopic and myopic adults.

METHODS

In experiment 1, five Clouclip devices were utilised. An infrared camera was used to visualise and measure infrared beam size and angle. Repeatability for distance tracking was assessed from 5 to 120 cm in 5 cm increments. Accuracy of distance tracking was investigated for paper and iPad targets, spatial integration was calculated, effects of target tilt were determined and light measurements were compared to a lux meter. In experiment 2, viewing behaviour was assessed in 41 subjects (21 non-myopic, 20 myopic) during four 15-min near tasks; (1) passive reading of printed material, (2) active writing on printed material, (3) passive viewing on an electronic device and (4) active engagement on an electronic device. Working distance was compared between tasks and refractive error groups.

RESULTS

Clouclip distance tracking showed good repeatability, with a mean difference of 0.34 cm and limits of agreement of ±2.0 cm. Clouclip-measured and actual distances were highly correlated for paper and electronic targets from 5 to 120 cm, with mean differences and limits of agreement of 3.96 ± 13.78 cm and 4.48 ± 8.92 cm, respectively; variability increased for distances >100 cm. Tracking ability increased with larger target sizes; tracking was accurate when the target occupied 1.5%-20.3% of tracking beam area, depending on distance and with target tilt up to ±60 degrees. Clouclip- and lux meter-measured ambient illumination were highly correlated for a wide range of intensities (r = 0.96, p < 0.001), but with greater variability for intensities >20 000 lux. The Clouclip infrared beam was measured to have a diameter of 25.6 ± 2.2° and a downward angle of 10.3 ± 0.5°. For subject testing, viewing distance was significantly closer for active and passive printed tasks (29.5 ± 6.7 cm and 33.2 ± 8.8 cm, respectively) than for active and passive electronic tasks (35.4 ± 8.0 cm and 40.8 ± 10.4 cm, respectively), with no differences between refractive error groups (p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The Clouclip performed well in measuring near and intermediate distances and could distinguish between indoor (<1000 lux) and outdoor (>1000 lux) illumination. A closer working distance was observed for printed tasks compared to those on an iPad, with no difference in viewing distance between non-myopic and myopic adults.